A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*

About this Item

Title
A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*
Author
White, Francis, 1564?-1638.
Publication
London :: Printed by Adam Islip,
1624.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Fisher, John, 1569-1641 -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Church of England -- Apologetic works -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15082.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15082.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 4, 2024.

Pages

ANSVVER.

If you had examined the place of Gregorie a 1.1, you might haue perceiued, that he diuideth Diuine Precepts, into generall or common Precepts, and into personall and speciall: and the words which you alleadge (paring off the rest, because they make a∣gainst you) wherein he saith, That they which are not iudged and raigne (Math. 19.27, 28.) doe transcend the Precepts of the Law, by the perfection of their vertues, &c. are vnderstood by him of ge∣nerall [ B] and common Precepts, which oblige all people, and not * 1.2 of speciall Commandements: but where a man is obliged by any Commandement, generall or speciall, there is no Super∣erogation. And that Saint Gregorie was farre from maintaining workes of Supererogation, appeareth by his perpetuall and constant Doctrine, concerning the defect and imperfection of mans righteousnesse b 1.3, and his renouncing all confidence in his owne worthinesse and deserts c 1.4.

The rest of the Fathers, to wit, Fulgentius, Paulinus, St. Au∣gustine, Optatus, St. Hierom, St. Chrysostome, Gregorie Nazianzen, St. Cyprian, Origen, and St. Ambrose, mention workes of Coun∣sell, and one of them saith, It is possible to doe more than is commanded. But this Father speaketh not thus, in respect of all the Commandements of God, for then hee must free iust persons from all sinne; but in respect of some particular Acti∣ons, [ D] to wit, whereas the Law of Charitie commandeth to di∣stribute a portion of goods to the poore, a man may bestow halfe his goods; neuerthelesse, he which performeth this, may be deficient another way, for he may fall short in the intension of his Charitie, and also in the measure of his Hope, Humilitie, and other vertues.

The Iesuit concludeth the place of Saint Ambrose, Lib. de viduis, with an Exclamation, saying, What can bee more clearely spoken for Workes of Counsell and Supererogation? But before his boasting, he should haue aduised better touching these Fathers meaning. First, Ambrose teacheth, that there is a difference [ E] betweene Precepts and Counsells. Secondly, That the obser∣uing * 1.5 of Counsells is not required of all, but of some. Thirdly, They which besides Precepts, obserue Counsells, are more profitable seruants, and shall receiue a greater reward.

Page 532

Now the Argument for Workes of Supererogation, from [ A] this Testimonie of St. Ambrose, must be as followeth.

If they are more profitable seruants, and receiue a greater reward, which performe some vertuous and laudable Actions, not inioyned by common Precept, but by Councell; then Workes of Supererogation must be granted.

But they are more profitable seruants, and receiue a greater re∣ward, which performe some vertuous Actions, not inioyned by common Precept, but by Councell, Ergo,

Workes of Supererogation must be granted.

I answere, denying the Consequence: for to the being and [ B] definition of Workes of Supererogation, more is required than the performing of some vertuous and rewardable Actions, inioyned by Councell, and not by common Precept, to wit, First, That the said vertuous and laudable Actions, bee neither inioyned by strict and morall Precept, nor yet by the Law of gratitude; for when the Fathers oppose Precepts and Councels, they vnderstand Precepts strictly, and not the Law of Grati∣tude. Secondly, They which supererogate, must doe the same vniuersally, and transcend the common rule in euery Precept [ C] and vertuous Action, and not in some alone. Thirdly, They must so transcend, that they be guiltie of no Omission or Com∣mission, either against the substance or perfection of any mo∣rall Commandement.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.